|
Published: April 20, 2009
“Moving beyond the Church, even beyond Jesus”
Vatican orders probe of Leadership Conference of Women Religious over “tenor and doctrinal content” of speeches at its annual assemblies
Toledo, Ohio, Apr 18, 2009 (CNA) -- The Leadership Conference of Women Religious is being investigated by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith because of the “tenor and doctrinal content” of various addresses at the organization’s annual assemblies since 2001. One such address described “moving beyond the Church, even beyond Jesus” as “the dynamic option” for religious life.
According to its website, the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR) has more than 1,500 members representing about 95 percent of the 59,000 women religious in the U.S.
Cardinal William Levada, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), announced the doctrinal review in a letter, according to the National Catholic Reporter.
 The cardinal noted that officials from the LCWR had met with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 2001. The officials were invited to report on LCWR members’ reception of Church teaching on the sacramental priesthood, the CDF document Dominus Iesus and “the problem of homosexuality.”
Dominus Iesus, published by the CDF in 2000 under then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, emphasized the uniqueness of Jesus Christ and established the differences between the Catholic Church and other religions. The document stated that only the Catholic Church possesses the fullness of the Christian faith.
“Given both the tenor and the doctrinal content of various addresses given at the annual assemblies of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious in the intervening years, this Dicastery can only conclude that the problems which had motivated its request in 2001 continue to be present,” Cardinal Levada said in his letter.
The Catholic Key reported that the keynote address at the LCWR 2007 annual assembly has aroused “particular concern and discussion.” In that keynote, titled “A Marginal Life: Pursuing Holiness in the 21st Century,” Sinsinawa Dominican Sister Laurie Brink commented on the decline of many religious orders. She characterized some successful new orders as being “acquiescent” to others’ expectations and also discussed the possible future of women religious. She described a “sojourning congregation” as “the dynamic option for Religious Life.”
In Sister Laurie’s words, such a congregation involves “moving beyond the Church, even beyond Jesus.”
“A sojourning congregation is no longer ecclesiastical,” said Sister Laurie. “It has grown beyond the bounds of institutional religion. Its search for the Holy may have begun rooted in Jesus as the Christ, but deep reflection, study and prayer have opened it up to the spirit of the Holy in all of creation. Religious titles, institutional limitations, ecclesiastical authorities no longer fit this congregation, which in most respects is Post-Christian.”
She described the Benedictine Women of Madison as having a commitment to “ecumenism,” which led them “beyond the exclusivity of the Catholic Church into a new inclusivity, where all manner of seeking God is welcomed. They are certainly religious women, but they are no longer women religious as it is defined by the Roman Catholic Church. They choose as a congregation to step outside the Church in order to step into a greater sense of holiness. Theirs was a choice of integrity, insight and courage.”
Cardinal Levada said that the assessment of the LCWR will be conducted by Toledo Bishop Leonard P. Blair. Bishop Blair is a member of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Doctrine.
Cardinal Levada said Bishop Blair’s principal purpose would be to “review the work of the LCWR in supporting its membership as communities of faith and witness to Christ in today’s church, and to offer any useful assistance.”
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 1:05 AM By John F. Maguire
A dangerous circumstance -- I mean where, as here, a nun can talk herself into the notion that "moving beyond the Church, even beyond Jesus" is a "dynamic option" for religious life. Did not Pope Pius IX teach that he or she "who does not have the Church for a mother cannot have God for a father, and whoever abandons the See of Peter on which the Church is established trusts falsely that he is in the Church" (_Singulari Quidem_)? Did not Pope Leo XIII solemnly advise that "by God's commandment salvation is to be found nowhere but in the Church" (_Annum Ingressi Sumus_)? Did not Leo warn, "He who scatters and gathers not, who gathers not with the Church and with Jesus Christ, and all who fight not jointly with Him and with the Church are in very truth contending against God" (_Sapientiae Christianae_)? And did not the Second Vatican Council teach that "they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse to enter it or to remain in it" (_Lumen Gentium_)? Or who, in the Church in a certain painfully ambiguous manner (were that possible), would aspire to go "beyond the Church" and thereby go "beyond" Christ's mystical Body?
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 5:17 AM By Fr. M.P.
This statement sums up the apostasy all too well: "moving beyond the Church, even beyond Jesus." And this: "beyond the exclusivity of the Catholic Church into a new inclusivity, where all manner of seeking God is welcomed" mimics freemasonry's indifferentism who accept any 'god' as light-bearer. That same principle is promoted by the United Religions Initiative. Moving beyond Jesus means only self-worship since obedience to God is rejected for selfish pleasures, including self-opinion worship called relativism. But it's all based on the same old lie in Genesis "ye shall be as gods knowing good and evil" but repackaged in modern lingo whereby such practitioners think they are oh so sophisticated.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 5:36 AM By Men Only?
Looks like the "men only" club, AKA the Vatican, can not handle the fact the women are standing up and trying to save the church.
The men have failed -- maybe they should listen to the women.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 5:48 AM By St. Christopher
What can the Church expect? Since Vatican II, the institutional Church as downplayed its own uniqueness, the central importance of its clergy, of the mass, of prayers and the entire Deposit of Faith handed down over the centuries. In fact, orthodox religious groups have been growing, and it is likely that women religious, and priests for that matter, will be increasingly those raised in traditional orders and from traditional seminaries and formation programs. To the extent that women religious say that they are "post-Christian" then they should be shown the door. The Church simply misses the point by trying to study the obvious (and for so long, too). These women are no longer committed nuns (if they ever were). Put another way, if these women are correct that they are now in "a greater sense of holiness" by moving away from the Church, then the Church should simply shut down. This is the "fruit" of the anti-Catholic "ecumenical" movement, which will surely rank as one of the seminal mistakes of Church leadership (and no, the Holy Ghost had nothing to do with it).
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 6:35 AM By Briney
I think it is very helpful to reflect on the reality of what many women religious have experienced. It does not mean that one is advocating for the3 most extreme position. Bishop Blair, in my experience, is a man with a very closed mind. I hope the Holy Spirit will enlighten and guide all involved.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 7:44 AM By Fr Wayne Campbell
While I see nothing instrinsically wrong with women wanted to be more expansive in scope - they do cease to be Catholic Religious. I think many of them still cannot see the connection between their dwindling numbers and the bluring of their Catholic identity.
It's simple denial that causes these dear women to do "get" why they are simply "dying out"
New forms of religious life are emerging and attracting women to their life. They are VERY strong in their Catholic identity and their love of their Church. History will see this for what it is. Rome has a right to question what these LCWR women stand for.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 7:55 AM By Ski Ven
Move beyond Jesus ... all the way to hell. Yeah, now that is a courageous choice. They have the courage of The Light Bearer.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 8:24 AM By JimAroo
About time!
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 8:48 AM By Gabe
Wow!! Is the Vatican so fearful of a group of religious women that they have to investigate them? I thought the church had gotten past the belief and teaching that only Catholics - or Christians - can get to heaven!! Believe me, I am not especially fond of the LCWR. As a survivor of sexual abuse by a religious woman who has tried over and over unsuccessfully to speak before their national conference, I am disappointed by their response to our attempts to educate about and prevent further sexual abuse by vowed religious women. However, they are women who try to help mold religious life to be effective in today's world. That may not fit in with the church's very backward, conservative teachings, but I didn't realize that we were going to go back to the methods of the Inquisition!!!
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 8:56 AM By Ron
Levada conducting a doctrinal review of the Leadership Conference of Women puts a new meaning to the fox watching the hen house.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 10:37 AM By Life Lady
The best assistance that the bishop can give to this lady is to invite her to step outside of the convent or home where she has been a pseudo religious and leave the Church. Weeding these dissenters out is a preliminary task of cleansing the Church, but necessary. Glad to see her and the rest of her kind leaving. It makes for a stronger Church when the corrupted leave on their own. She has already left in spirit, its just her person that must leave...
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 10:54 AM By JOE
I TAKE MY HAT OFF TO CARDINAL LEVADA ON HIS ORDERING AN INVESTIGATION OF THIS ORGANIZATION WHO REPORTEDLY REPRESENTS 95% OF ALL WOMEN RELIGIOUS IN USA. THESE WOMEN IN MY MIND ARE NO LONGER FAITHFUL TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH MAGISTERIUM .
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 11:22 AM By Dave
Gabe, every Catholic who loves his/her faith -- clergy and laity alike -- should fear EVERY group that tries to downplay or outright deny Church teaching. That's why the Church is investigating this group; she doesn't want to see her flock led astray. And as for the belief that only Catholics or Christians in general can get to heaven, you're way off-base. The Church has ALWAYS taught that outside of her there's no salvation (extra ecclesia nulla salus) and that anyone outside of her, UNLESS they're invincibly ignorant, will be damned. But even if a non-Catholic or non-Christian makes it to heaven (we don't know how often that happens), they don't get saved IN SPITE OF Christ and His Church but rather BECAUSE OF THEM. I'm really sorry to hear about the abuse you experienced at the hands of a religious sister, but that's beside the point. You talk about religious life needing to be effective in today's world, but that can only be possible if religious women submit to Christ and His Church in ALL things. That's why most of the religious orders where heresy and heterodoxy are rampant are dying out -- discerners these days aren't attracted to ignoring the Magisterium, not wearing habits, etc.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 11:55 AM By Dan
"That may not fit in with the church's very backward, conservative teachings, but I didn't realize that we were going to go back to the methods of the Inquisition!!! " Gabe, it would be my hope that Bishop Blair would do as Bishop Levada has asked: "to render useful assistance." You will have to explain to me how this is inquisitorial, as I cannot make the connection. I agree with Fr. Wayne Campbell that Rome has every right to question what these women stand for, especially when they wish to go "beyond Jesus." It is a reasonable fear to many, and I include myself in this group, that there is nothing beyond Jesus but pitfalls and even the ruin of souls.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 12:02 PM By Anne T.
I don't think they are investigating the women because they are afraid of them. I think it is the other way around, and it is about time. I remember meeting one nun years ago who did not even believe in the Holy Trinity. They finally got her out of our area.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 12:09 PM By Tee
Well, it is ABOUT time, some official eccelsiastical body played Toto, stepped up to the plate to pull the curtain back on the LCWR. That has been a den of dissent from the days of one of my most charming college professors taking a sabbatical to found it: Carondolet CSJ St Annette Walters, a LONG time ago. Perhaps the LCWR can join forces with Notre Dame and lead even more mostly uneducated since VC II CINO Catholics astray. When will THE CHURCH take a charitably forceful stance to save God's children? Mea culpa on their behalf.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 1:02 PM By dana wheeler
This was noted in 2001 and is just now being addressed? It seems like something should have been done in 2001 or even 2002! Is there no accountablilty anymore? So-called Catholic Universities such as Georgetown, are no more Catholic than Ohio State... probably less so. At some point someone will have to address all of this, no?
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 1:09 PM By James
Sounds like the LCWR is one of those "Witches Organizations". They want to go beyond our Saviour with their evil pride and deceive others to follow them into the fires of hell. How frightening and how very important for them to be exposed for what the LCWR truly is. The Roman Catholic Church used to teach for centuries there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church. Pray for these poor souls whom have fallen astray. Pray that the religious orders of the nuns returns in all its grandieur and beauty. In the old days, sisters lived in convents, wore habits, were easily recognized and were treated with the utmost respect and revered for their holy examples. Oh yes, some of us naughty in catholic schools were reprimanded in those days, and for the repeat offenders perhaps harshly, but it was well deserved. Our sinful pride was hurt perhaps moreso than our rapped nuckles. We knew where we stood and they loved us all. I wish those days could return. Our world would be so much better off.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 1:20 PM By Jon
When will Rome probe the USCCB for doctrinal fidelity?
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 2:00 PM By betty
I'm still trying to understand how anyone can talk about moving "beyond Jesus" and being "post-Christian", whatever that means. It just doesn't make sense.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 2:06 PM By Anne T.
Also, this should not be referred to as an "inquistition". Anyone who does not want to be a nun, or even a Catholic, is not forced to be one.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 2:44 PM By Ski Ven
For those of you that misunderstood my reference, the light bearer that I was referring to is the darkness bearer nowadays.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 3:27 PM By Benidicta Edith
Beyond the Church and beyond Jesus sounds like these Nuns are on the run from the truth of the Church which is the Body of Christ instituted by Jesus Christ through the Apostle Peter. Jesus is the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. Jesus is the only way to the Father. Only the truth will set all of mankind free. Be not deceived.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 4:18 PM By cjo
More fruits of Vatican II ??
Next, they should review Univ of Notre Dame and the USCCB !!!
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 5:07 PM By Thuvia Parth
In reply to James: The Catholic Church never taught the outside the Church there is no salvation in a sense that denies baptism by desire. Nor, certainly since the initial work against the paranoid habit of charging women with witchcraft inaugurated (albeit incompletely) by Fr. Friedrick Spee von Langenfield (1591-1635), would anyone, in good conscience, countenance scapegoating women by imputing to them witchcraft, however symbolically. Nor should anyone be drawn into making such imputations, not even by the provocations of "organizations" of self-described "witches." For these reasons I find your post naive and
unhelpful.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 6:40 PM By MarkF
Just a quick thought... did anyone notice that the only defense of the LCWR comes from those who say that the Church is only doing this because she fears women? Won't any of them defend these crazy notions of "sojourning" and moving "beyond Jesus?" Look over on NCR. Those people are going nuts with that line of attack. If the Church is only doing this because she's afraid of women, then how come the Pope also investigated the all male seminaries? And why is the Pope also investigating the Legion of Christ? Thank God for Pope Benedict.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 6:53 PM By Mark from PA
James, "Witches Organizations" is rather misogynistic. You talk of kids being reprimanded "perhaps harshly, but it was well deserved." Sorry, but no child deserves to be physically abused. I witnessed some abuse when I was a kid and there was no excuse for it. I think some of the changes made by religious orders were for the good.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 9:13 PM By Mary Ann, SingingMum
Why should we be giving contributions to and learning from anyone who calls themselves 'post-Christian'?
They are merely using us if they choose to be supported by the Church, so competent authority is right to investigate on our behalf.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 10:02 PM By JLS
There is no salvation outside the Church, because the Church consists of people who receive salvation, and not of people who don't. If someone receives salvation, then that one is a member of the Church; if someone does not, then that one is not a member of the Church and thus is outside the Church.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 10:03 PM By JLS
Thuvia P, there are indeed witches and there is witchcraft. Like other evils, it is necessary to point out the fact and the specifics in season and out of season.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 10:08 PM By JLS
Yes, MarkF, I noticed that also. Guilty consciences often set one further and further into a state of fear. John Paul II always preached and taught "Do not be afraid". The Holy Spirit is the Comforter ... the faithful have no place being afraid of anything. St Paul teaches us, "Do not be anxious about anything". Easier said than done, but the difference is that some people ignore faith and make a life of fear for themselves.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 10:11 PM By ALFONSO
"A congregation moving beyond the church, even beyond Jesus" -- this is so awful it should convict everyone that we are in the era of apostacy. Wonderful sisters who once gave everything to the Lord in great hope and joy have come to this? How terrible! How terrible! Sister Lucia of Fatima warned that the devil was in a battle against consecrated souls.
|
Posted Monday, April 20, 2009 10:12 PM By Anna Tolana
This is not about clergy abuse by nuns, but rather, women who are more intelligent than their male counterparts.
|
Posted Tuesday, April 21, 2009 4:39 AM By Mark from PA
Benedicta Edith, your comments were fitting. Yes, Jesus is the Alpha and the Omega. I am confused as to what "beyond Jesus" is supposed to mean. I think the Catholic Church needs to put more emphasis on Christ.
|
Posted Tuesday, April 21, 2009 6:31 AM By Richard Perozich
At some point a person ceases to be Catholic, and if she remains in the church, undermines its faith, its goodness substituting herself as a false prophet and priestess serving another god. Enough sisters need repentance, yet there are many faithful ones also.
|
Posted Tuesday, April 21, 2009 6:47 AM By Ski Ven
If a dissident objects to something that James posted, then James must have said something that is pretty good.
|
Posted Tuesday, April 21, 2009 6:54 AM By Ann Landell
I thought the following quote was interesting: some successful new orders as being “acquiescent” to others’ expectations
These nuns claim that their inspiration comes from deep reflection and prayer. In prayer aren't we always seeking the will of God -- not our own will -- and therefore aren't we
acquiescent to another. If not, then we are following self == a very dubious leader often.
|
Posted Tuesday, April 21, 2009 12:22 PM By JLS
Anna Tolana, human intellect pales compared with faith. Consider that St Thomas Aquinas, among the top handful of philosophers and theologians of all time and places, was holier than he was intelligent. Intelligence is best used in the service of faith ... that is the problem with these nuns, not that they are intelligent, but that they lack faith. There have been and are countless women of high intellect, and amazingly some of them put it to work for God and not for the world, the flesh and the devil.
|
Posted Tuesday, April 21, 2009 1:13 PM By James
Yes Ski, what Thuvia posts is not true. According to Roman Catholic teaching, if one is baptised by desire or by their blood, they ipso facto are members of Holy Mother the Church and are eligible for salvation. Salvation is not necessarily guaranteed as it depends on what sins they committed after their baptism and their confessing before a priest, and the sorrow they have for their sins. God is our judge and He will decide whether we go to Heaven or hell, and prescribe our atonement on earth and in purgatory before we may enter His Kingdom in Heaven. Even as a naughty little boy, I still loved the nuns and would rather take their punishments than those of my loving responsible parents. Its all a matter of frame of mind. Some people appreciate the greater things of life (eternal over earthly) more than others. If I hadn't been punished, who knows where I'd be today -- worse off spiritully and materially I am convinced!
|
Posted Tuesday, April 21, 2009 2:11 PM By Anne T.
St. Bernadette was not particularly intelligent or smart by human standards, but she had a great deal of true faith. God raises up the humble, not those who toot their own horn and deny His Son.
|
Posted Wednesday, April 22, 2009 2:31 AM By Richard Flores
The evil deception of the New Age, "eastern religions has infiltrated many groups. Why isn't GOD (Jesus) enough? Because their arrogance is NOT based in God's humility, but in man's (or in this case, woman's) arrogance! When Satan infiltrates and poisons your heart, it's always totally destructive in the end!
Every time I hear "post-Christian", I just want to weep for the lost souls! They are going down the path of eventual spiritual death.
I am SO proud of the church leadership for denying them any legitimacy and by reacting quickly to squash this heresy. To those who welcome this type of heresy, I pray for you, too.
|
Posted Wednesday, April 22, 2009 9:50 AM By Dan
"This is not about clergy abuse by nuns, but rather, women who are more intelligent than their male counterparts." Anna, my I ask the basis for this claim? Thanks in advance, Dan.
|
Posted Wednesday, April 22, 2009 1:47 PM By Fr. M.P.
Anna, Satan (Lucifer) was the most intelligent angel. What did intelligence without obedience to God get him?
|
Posted Wednesday, April 22, 2009 1:50 PM By James
I figured it would strike a nerve or two with my comments about the nuns of yesteryear that I truly miss. Out of the hundreds of thousands of people that read these articles and associated blogs some have in the past expressed a distaste for those nuns at one point or another during their school years. I ask though of all the 10s of thousands of nuns in full habits that used to teach daily in our nation before the liberal changes of the 1960's was anyone so harshly punished that they needed medical help, hospital or emergency room care? What was the norm and what was the exception? My point is, do let not a few exceptions paint a bad and false picture of the norm. Just like the old saying goes: "Don't judge a book by its cover". The priests, brothers, and nuns of my youth were the finest citizens of the land! The nuns in those days were the most beautiful and holy. We need to remember them, and pray for them in our prayers, obviously they set us on the right trail. For protection of our faith pray to St. Michael: St. Michael the Archangel defend us in the battle, be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him we humbly pray, and do thou oh great prince of the heavenly host, by the power of God thrust into hell Satan and all the evil spirits whom prowl the world seeking the ruin of souls. Amen. Most Sacred Heart of Jesus have mercy on us. Most Sacred Heart of Jesus have mercy on us. Most Sacred Heart of Jesus have mercy on us.
|
Posted Wednesday, April 22, 2009 3:24 PM By Anne T.
James, I went to public school, and we had about twenty-five children in my first grade classroom in the early 1950's. One of my friend's husband went to a Catholic school at the same time where the nuns had forty students in each class. Those poor nuns had to be drill sargeants just to keep the classroom in control, let alone teach. Now some teachers are complaining when they have over thirty students per classroom, and that is with at least a part-time or full-time instructional assistant and parent helpers. So Catholics and everyone should find out the facts before we blame the nuns or any other teacher for being "mean".
|
Posted Wednesday, April 22, 2009 3:27 PM By Anne T.
I meant to correct "sargeant" to "sergeant" in my last post. I click the "Post Comment" too soon.
|
Posted Wednesday, April 22, 2009 3:31 PM By Anne T.
By the way, James, I was not accusing you of calling nuns mean, but so many other people do that I was glad to read how much you appreciated your teaching nuns.
|
Posted Thursday, April 23, 2009 5:35 AM By MarkF
What I don't get is why these same women who talk about "sojourning" from the Church get so upset when they are in effect, given a choice between staying in the Church or leaving her? Isn't that what sojourning is all about, leaving? What are they complaining about? If you read the original article that talked about sojourning, the biblical point of departure was the story of Abraham, Sarah and Hagar. The see themselves as Hagar, who sojourned through the desert on her own. But in their version of the story, Hagar is the heroine, which shows their lack of understanding of God's ways. The big mistake they make is to assume that in Genesis any action by the patriarchs is supposed to be a good one. The patriarchs and their people constantly make mistakes, but they are still God's people. Sarah and Abraham treat Hagar terribly, but the scripture is not endorsing that, just showing us that God uses flawed people to his own ends. Sarah laughs at God's promises, Abraham does not follow what God commands him to do. Yet they became the parents of Isaac and through him the lineage of Jesus. Lot should never have lived in Sodom. He never should have offered his daughters to be raped by the men of Sodom. Yet I've heard radical dissenters use Lot's error to throw away the whole story. When you read the Old Testament, and in particular Genesis remember that when one of the patriarchs makes a mistake, the author of Genesis will not point it out. But the consequences of their sin will be apparent in a chapter or so. +Chaput is so right that catechesis has been a disaster in the last forty years.
|
Posted Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:12 AM By Cathy M
The government has leverage on religious groups because of the tax-exemption privilege. Church leaders, eager for the church to be free to be the church, should ask for the removal of this privilege. If there were no tax privilege for religious groups, hucksters and people who are using religion as a cover for political movements would be discouraged.
|
Posted Friday, April 24, 2009 6:03 AM By JLS
Cathy M, I second your vote. Moreover, if the govt can print money in the basement, then certainly God can supply the Church with Her financial needs without a tax deferment system.
|
Posted Thursday, April 30, 2009 4:27 PM By Thuvia Parth
In reply to James: In failing to distinguish between juridical membership in the Church (visible membership), on the one hand, and an attachment to the Church by virtue of baptism of desire or baptism by blood, on the other hand, you've simply misread my position on this important subject. Baptism by desire effects an invisible attachment to the visible Church. Such, James, is the universal consensus of Catholic theologians.
|
Posted Thursday, April 30, 2009 4:40 PM By Thuvia Parth
In reply to Ski Ven: Whether blogger James has said something correct or incorrect regarding Catholic ecclesiology is a matter of inquiry and proof. Yet you by-pass inquiry and proof, throw up your hands, and proclaim: If someone "objects to something James posted, then James must have said something that is pretty good." Your claim here is nothing more than a *non sequitur*. You seem to think that blogger James is right *ipse dixit* -- that is, simply because he himself (ipse) says something (dixit). Dedicated nuns have always cautioned students against such faulty argumentation.
|
Posted Thursday, April 30, 2009 4:49 PM By Thuvia Parth
In reply to JLS: Although I protest the syndrome in which, as soon as some group of women are shown to be errant, the topic witchcraft comes up, still the very least you could do, by way of contributing to the discussion, is define the word "witch" as you propose to use it and then adduce historical or ethnographic evidence for the existence
of witches in keeping with your definition. But no, JLS, you appear instead to be content simply sound-off from the top of your head.
|
Posted Thursday, April 30, 2009 8:31 PM By JLS
Thuvia, as to your question about witches, why are you trying to enlist me to do your research? I know a witch when I see one. I've run into them occasionally since the 60s. I'm not into book learning about witches, as I see no point in it. I just steer clear of them. I have seen black magic and witchcraft at work ... and I keep in mind the letters among the Letters to the Seven Churches warning the faithful not to delve into the deep secrets ... meaning Satanic stuff. You need to dig into Godly creatures such as St Michael the Archangel, Blessed Mary Ever Virgin, and many other powerful saints. St Padre Pio did not, as far as I know, study evil, but studied how to defeat evil. Same with exorcists as far as I know ... they do not study the evil, but the remedies.
|
Posted Thursday, April 30, 2009 8:33 PM By JLS
Thuvia, the reason I "sound off from the top of my head", as you describe it, is because that is the closest part of me to Heaven.
|
Posted Friday, May 01, 2009 7:36 AM By Ski Ven
I am trying to figure out where Parth is coming from. I don't know what a stinking non sequitur is. I wasn't saying that James is right because he said something. That doesn't make any sense. What is this person talking about?
|
Posted Friday, May 01, 2009 12:07 PM By Thuvia Parth
The crudeness of your language ("stinking non sequitur") matches your apparent contempt for traditional learning, not to say your apparent contempt for Latin phrases. Latin is not only the normative language of the liturgy, Ski -- it is the classical language of all humane learning in the Christian West. If, then, one does not know what ad hominem means, one looks it up. If one does not know what non sequitur means -- then likewise....
|
Posted Friday, May 01, 2009 12:55 PM By JLS
Ski Ven, everybody knows that a non sequitor is a sequitor that does not exist.
|
Posted Friday, May 01, 2009 1:01 PM By JLS
Thuvia, if Latin is that great, then why doesn't everyone speak it?
|
Posted Friday, May 01, 2009 1:34 PM By Ski Ven
I have contempt for overbearing via book knowledge in general, not just "traditional learning". I don't care if the excess in fancy words and arrogance comes from "traditional learning" or nontraditional learning. I can't help but notice your use of the word apparent. Politicians speak speak like that when they want to accuse someone of something while just stopping short of actually saying it so that they can have deniability. The thing is that I have already used Latin phrases on this website before, so those that do remember things that I have wrote will know that I don't have contempt for the Latin language.
|
Posted Friday, May 01, 2009 8:17 PM By JLS
People who earnestly desire the things of God will not need to split hairs in theology arguments, which is what Latin is used for. It provides a bulwark against the clever tongued who never cease to seek some escape from the Will of God, yet want to carry on the appearance of righteousness.
|
Posted Saturday, May 02, 2009 11:23 AM By Thuvia Parth
In reply to Ski Ven: Just as it is commonplace to use the phrase *ad hominem* rather than the awkward English phrase "against the man [himself, i.e., rather than against the argument he or she has advanced, so likewise it is commonplace to use the phrase *non sequitur* rather than the cumbersome phrase "[the argument] does not follow". *** The use of the the word "apparent" is a polite form the purpose of which is to let the other person off the hook. It allows the other person -- here your -- to say, yes, that it is what it appears I meant but that is not what I really meant. In short, used in this way, the word *apparent* is a form of civility. As such, it has nothing to do with the dust-in-your-eyes intentions you associate with certain politicians.
|
Posted Saturday, May 02, 2009 11:41 AM By Thuvia Parth
In reply to JLS: You ask: "If Latin is that great, then why doesn't everyone speak it?" Come now, JLS, you can't be serious. Latin is the sacred language of the Church in the primary etymological sense of the word *sacred*: namely, *that which is set apart*. Latin is that language which the Catholic Church has set apart as her very own language. From the point of view of the three Abrahamitic religions -- those three religions that derive from Abraham's experience in the desert (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) -- we have the sacred language of the people of Moses (Hebrew); we have the sacred language of Islam (Arabic), and we have the sacred language of the Church (Latin). To ask why not everyone speaks Hebrew, Latin, or Arabic is to miss the point of sacred languages altogether.
|
Posted Saturday, May 02, 2009 3:28 PM By Thuvia Parth
JLS, let me ask you this: How many women in the course of human history do think have been executed based on the superstition that "I know a witch when I see one"?
|
Posted Saturday, May 02, 2009 7:53 PM By M. F. X. Hurley
A self-complacent contempt for books strikes a decided noted of barbary. What gives, Ski Ven? To hold books in contempt is to hold the persons who have written them in contempt. It is to hold the truth contained in books in contempt -- and if books also contain error, it is to hold in contempt the intellectual work necessary to distinguish truth from error.
|
Posted Saturday, May 02, 2009 10:00 PM By Anne T.
Ski Ven, sometimes one can just put those Latin phases in one's search engine and a dictionary or other article will come up with the explanation of the phrase or word. You can even do it when you are on this website by putting the phrase in the search bar, clicking the website you want, read the answer, than click the back arrow until you get back to this website.
|
Posted Sunday, May 03, 2009 9:49 AM By Mark from PA
Good comment (3:28 PM), Thuvia Parth.
|
Posted Sunday, May 03, 2009 10:56 AM By Val Dimetri
The Church has not set Latin apart from other languages. It's that Latin is dead which sets it apart. The Church chose it for that reason. There's nothing especially "sacred" about it except it's dead. If it were to come alive again the Church might well abandon it for another dead language.
|
Posted Sunday, May 03, 2009 1:05 PM By MarkF
Back on earth here, we are not dealing with witchcraft in the women's orders, we are dealing with radical heresy.
|
Posted Sunday, May 03, 2009 2:15 PM By JLS
Thuvia, God has given us the faculties to discern nature, supernature, imitations, and things of the devil. It is the Catholic's responsibility to live life according to the will of God, which is managed by the popes and bishops. They've brought us twothousand years up the road from Pentecost. If you want to find out the will of God regarding witches, then search Scripture. One well known story is when King Saul, the first king under the Mosaic era, consulted with a witch who brought forth a "familiar spirit", in violation of God's Law. Saul paid the price, and David took the throne. Witchcraft is not benign, as we can see from this one instance alone. I've run into witchcraft ... it is real and is linked to the devil. If all you do is read books about such stuff, then there is no way you can really find out for yourself, is there? You then have to rely on people who have actually encountered reality to inform you, right? Otherwise you have only the recourse of debating which books are right and which are wrong. Sin clouds the human conscience, in different ways for different people ... that is why the mystical Body of Christ is made of members each of whom is unique, and can offer what no other member is able to offer. Organization is what this is. Too often some people insist that we are all the same and no one has a grip on reality that is unique ... well, I'm here to tell you that it takes teamwork to understand what is real. Scripture calls it counsel ... sharing views and ideas.
|
Posted Sunday, May 03, 2009 6:18 PM By JLS
Church Latin is "dead" only to those who don't find life in it. It was not adopted due to being "dead" at all, but because it was the most important language in the world where Christianity was evangelizing at the time the doctrines were worked up into theology. The earliest Christian languages were not Latin, but mainly Greek. The scholarly language in Christianity was Latin, and those writers put everything into that language. The reason it will not be changed is due to the inherent problem of translating from one to another language. For example, the "official" translators can hardly get it right in English when they are commissioned to do so, which is why the only official English language Bible is the Douay-Rheims translation. Even the Vulgate was translated by St Jerome from mainly Greek and Hebrew into Latin, long before Latin was a dead language ... again, Latin was the most prominent academic language in the time the writers put the doctrine into it. Translations from Greek and even Hebrew were not so much of a problem then, because of the level of technology then compared to today ... a wagon wheel was a wagon wheel then ... today there are countless varieties for countless purposes. The modern languages morph rapidly. Also to note, St Jerome used the Greek OT which was originally produced in Alexandria under the Latin language Roman Empire. Not sure if he also used the Hebrew OT. But the academics and educated people of those times knew both Latin and Greek as well as perhaps some local tongues.
|
Posted Sunday, May 03, 2009 8:14 PM By Thuvia Parth
In reply to Val Dimetri: Your dismissive claim that "There's nothing especially 'sacred' about [the Latin language] except it's dead", is false. In his Apostolic Constitution _Veterum Sapientia_ [On the Promotion of the Study of Latin] (February 22, 1962), Pope John XXIII explains: "The wisdom of the ancient world, enshrined in Greek and Roman literature, and the truly memorable teaching of ancient peoples, served, surely, to herald the dawn of the Gospel which God's Son, 'the judge and teacher of grace and truth, the light and guide of the human race,' proclaimed on earth." Accordingly, "the inauguration of Christianity did not mean the obliteration of man's past achievements. Nothing was lost that was in any way true, just, noble and beautiful. ~ The Church has ever held the literary evidences of this wisdom in the higest esteem. She values especially the Greek and Latin languages in which wisdom itself is cloaked, as it were, in a vesture of gold. ~ But amid [the ancient world's] variety of languages a primary place must surely be given to that language which had its origins in LATIUM, and later proved so admirable a means for the spreading of Christianity through the West. ~ And since in God's special Providence this language united so many nations together under the authority of the Roman Empire --and that for so many centuries -- it also became the rightful language of the Apostolic See. Preserved for posterity, it proved to be a bond of unity for the Christian peoples of Europe. ~ Of its very nature Latin is most suitable for promoting every form of culture among peoples. It gives rise to no jealousies. It does not favor any one nation, but presents itself with equal impartiality to all and is equally acceptable to all. ~ For these reasons the Apostolic See has always been at pains to preserve Latin, deeming it worthy of being used in the exercise of her teaching authority 'as the splendid vesture of her heavenly doctrine and sacred laws'."
|
Posted Sunday, May 03, 2009 8:35 PM By Thuvia Parth
In further reply to Val Dimetri: You write: "If [Latin] were to come alive again, the Church might well abandon it for another dead language." Pope John XXIII, however, strongly suggests otherwise. "Thus the 'knowledge and use of this language,' so intimately bound up with the Church's life, 'is important not so much on cultural or literary grounds, as for religious reasons.' These are the words of Our Prededessor Pius XI, who conducted a scientific inquiry into this whole subject, and indicated three qualities of the Latin language which harmonize to a remarkable degree with the Church's nature. 'For the Church, precisely because it embraces all nations and is destined to endure to the end of time... of its very nature requires a language which is universal, immutable, and non-vernacular'" [Pius XI, _Epist. Ap. Officiorum omnium_, Aug. 1, 1922]. Given this finding, Mr. Dimetri, there can be no plausible talk to the effect that "the Church might well abandon [Latin] for another dead language."
|
Posted Sunday, May 03, 2009 9:17 PM By Thuvia Parth
In reply to JLS: Your asseverations against the Church's use of the Latin language are likewise refuted by Pope John XXIII. You write: "...Split[ting] hairs in theology arguments, is what Latin is used for." Very much to the contrary, JLS. To advance such a charge -- to quote John XXIII again -- is "to overlook the characteristic nobility of Latin formal structure. Its 'concise, varied, harmonious style, full of majesty and dignity' [_Epist. Ap. Officiorum omnium_, Aug. 1, 1922] makes for singular clarity and impressiveness of expression." Latin, then, is a language keyed not to obfuscation but to clarity. This is why "the major sacred sciences," Pope John specifies, "shall be taught in Latin, which, as we know from many centuries of use, 'must be considered most suitable for explaining with the utmost facility and clarity the most difficult and profound ideas and concepts' [_Epist. S. Cong. Stud. *Vehementer sane, ad Ep. universos*, July 1, 1908]." Indeed, the contemporary loss of the clarity afforded by Latin has contributed to certain muddles that have arisen due to theologians' naive recourse to unduly vague, vernacular formulations of key dogmatic truths of the Faith. "For apart from the fact that [Latin] has long since been enriched with a vocabulary of appropriate and unequivocal terms, best calculated to safeguard the integrity of the Catholic Faith, it also serves in no slight measure to prune away useless verbiage."
|
Posted Sunday, May 03, 2009 9:30 PM By Thuvia Parth
How does this discussion of the importance of the Latin language to the life of the Church tie back to problems pertaining to the life of women religious in the United States? Here is but a beginning of a possible answer: Some of the best Latinists in the United States had once been women religious. Let us, then, restore both the traditional Latin Mass and classical studies to the formation of women religious. Let us return Latin to "the offices of religious orders" of men and women religious alike (Pope John XXIII, _Veterum Sapientiae_, February 22, 1962).
|
Posted Sunday, May 03, 2009 10:37 PM By Val Dimetri
Thuvia, fluffy talk doesn't conceal that Latin is a DEAD language. Rather, the fluffy talk extolls its death! Pope Pius XI (Officiorum Omnium, 1922): "The Church… requires a language which is… non-vernacular." A DEAD language fits the task! Pope Pius XII (Mediator Dei): "The use of the Latin language affords at once an imposing sign of unity and an effective safeguard against the corruption of true doctrine." Again, because it’s DEAD! Pope John XXIII (encyclical Veterum Sapientia, 1962): “[Latin] gives rise to no jealousies. It does not favor any one nation… [It is] a constant norm by which to gauge the exact meaning of other renderings… It is set and unchanging. It has long since ceased to be affected by those alterations in the meaning of words which are the normal result of daily, popular use.” Yet again, exactly because it’s DEAD! In short, the numerous statements give clear guidance that if Latin were to come alive again, the Church might well abandon it for another dead language. universal, immutable and non-vernacular.
|
Posted Monday, May 04, 2009 1:33 PM By Thuvia Parth
Like what language other than Latin, Val -- Sumerian?
|
Posted Monday, May 04, 2009 3:10 PM By Elaine
Thuvia Parth, the language of charity works well. As a start, realize that what you read on this forum is not always what someone has posted, nor is it always understood by the reader any better than Sumerian. I also suspect there's been some behind-the scenes-editing of what we read here.
|
© California Catholic Daily 2009. All Rights Reserved.
|